Town Hall Plan For Somers Rejected In Tie Vote

SOMERS — A hopeful Robert Percoski returned to the board of finance Monday with the same town hall renovation proposal the panel had rejected a month ago.

But after much discussion between board members -- including accusations of political strategizing -- Percoski, Somers' first selectman, saw his second effort dismissed in a 3-3 tie that killed approval of the $127,000 project.

The decision ended weeks of posturing by both sides, pitting fiscal conservatism against a loud call for emergency funding to the town hall which continues to be in violation of federal requirements for handicapped people.

``The funding is there,'' said Percoski. ``The work should be done now. The selectmen feel that from a health hazard and safety point of view this is still a good project.''

``I don't see any holes in this [plan],'' said Roland, adding funding would come from state money set aside for local capital improvements -- $275,000 of which is available.

But several board members criticized Percoski for submitting a plan that does not address all the violations of federal law.

``I want all the areas identified,'' said board Chairman Peter Sonski, who voted against the proposal. ``Tell me over time what I'm going to be expected to finance.''

The violations surprised Sonski, who said he did not know about the problems. He has been the most vocal opponent of the renovation project, complaining it was submitted too late, after the budget process last spring.

Sonski said he visited town halls in Stafford, Ellington, East Windsor, Suffield and Enfield and found all in compliance.

Some board members agreed with Percoski, saying that completing parts of the project each year is the most feasible way to address the problems.

Board member Stephen Krasinski said the town can't afford to address a complete proposal.

In early September, Somers' building inspector, Robert Lauzier, condemned parts of the building because of the violations. Lauzier sent a correspondence to Percoski and the board of finance informing them that he was filing a complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice.

In the letter he said the board's rejection came because members knew little about the 40-year-old problems in the building. But board members said they could not be blamed for problems that were identified in 1993 by selectmen.

Last month, three of the five board members present agreed with Sonski, saying there's a need for capital improvement projects to be included during the regular budgetary process. During that meeting however, Krasinski was absent.

Monday, board members Pronovost, Krasinski and John Adler voted in favor of the plan. Sonski, Jim Persano and George Warner voted against it.